No. 22-5897

Unises Chapotin v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2022-10-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: circuit-split criminal-sentencing due-process johnson-precedent johnson-v-united-states section-2255 sentencing-guidelines united-states-sentencing-guidelines vagueness void-for-vagueness
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Securities Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-11-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the residual clause in Section 4B1.2 of the previously binding United States Sentencing Guidelines is void for vagueness pursuant to Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015)

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1) Whether the residual clause in Section 4B1.2 of the previously binding United States Sentencing Guidelines is void for vagueness pursuant to Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). 2) Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s rule that published orders respecting applications for leave to file second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions are binding precedent violates due process. i INTERESTED PARTIES There are no

Docket Entries

2022-11-21
Petition DENIED.
2022-11-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/18/2022.
2022-10-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-10-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 23, 2022)

Attorneys

Unises Chapotin
Sara Wilson KaneFederal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent